Frances Kissling, the founder of the pro-abortion rights group "Catholics for a Free Choice," organized a conference at Princeton a few weeks back seeking "common ground" in the abortion wars.She didn't find any.The always-interesting Will Saletan attended the conference, too, and then interviewed Kissling on BloggingHeadsTV (watch it here: http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/32548) about how to bring an end to the abortion wars.To hear them talk, Middle East peace is nothing, apparently, compared to the search for "peace" in the abortion wars. Peace? Peace? By and large, we have that. In spite of one of the most intense moral disagreements possible -- where close to half the American people believe that a legal slaughter of a million persons takes place each year -- peace reigns; the civil order is sustained. Brother does not take up arms against brother over this issue. Instead, we hold elections and discussions and conferences.Is this really so bad?But there's a large subtext to the discussion here: By "peace," I think people like Frances Kissling mean a stable political compromise that takes abortion out of the political process in such a way that Democrats don't lose elections because of the issue. She pretty much comes out and admits that, writing in Salon.com that "the damaging effect of abortion conflict on the political process has pushed moderates on all sides toward more civil debate, which was a goal of the conference."She means, I suspect, that groups like the Susan B. Anthony List have grown into political powerhouses by raising money to knock off pro-abortion politicians in swing districts that the Democrats would like to win. That's what "peace" means to Kissling and friends. They are looking for a way to win the "middle" and put the pro-life political movement out of business. She's particularly willing, if not eager, to concede that late-term abortions might have to go. It's a big concession from her point of view.Will Saletan has chimed in with his version of the great compromise: We start a new push to stigmatize those who fail to use contraception, fund unwed mothers better, and consider limiting second-trimester and other late-term abortion. Pro-lifers give up opposition to contraception, and pro-choicers assign some value to the fetus and to reducing the abortion rate. As on the gay marriage issue (another issue which is difficult to compromise), the futility of imagining a "deal" quickly becomes evident. Cultural contests on core moral assumptions cannot be settled by political compromise, since there is no one authorized to make such a deal. And the reality is, because each side operates from deeply different core moral assumptions, each side is willing only to take the half-loaf while working toward the full loaf."Common ground" quickly becomes a euphemism for finding a way to make abortion a pro-Democratic rather than a pro-Republican "wedge" issue.There is only one real way to do this: Overturn Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade, in my view, damaged our political process by elevating the killing of an unborn child to a sacred Constitutional right. But Roe v. Wade has also damaged our political process by protecting pro-abortion folks from the necessity of entering into it. The Supreme Court is doing pro-choicers' work for them, and in the process, preventing them from the necessity of building political alliances with the middle.You want to put us "absolute" pro-lifers on the spot? Repeal Roe v. Wade.Then in the democratic process, all of us Americans would have to make hard new choices about how anti-abortion and how pro-life we really are willing to be.(Maggie Gallagher is the founder of the National Organization for Marriage and has been a syndicated columnist for 14 years.)BPM 08-08 tracks.Sierra (Terratec) mp3 download.Pizzicato Five We Love You tracks.Special (New mixes) (VR036) tracks.Earthloop mp3 albums
TO END THE ABORTION WARS, REPEAL ROE V. WADE
Frances Kissling, the founder of the pro-abortion rights group "Catholics for a Free Choice," organized a conference at Princeton a few weeks back seeking "common ground" in the abortion wars.She didn't find any.The always-interesting Will Saletan attended the conference, too, and then interviewed Kissling on BloggingHeadsTV (watch it here: http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/32548) about how to bring an end to the abortion wars.To hear them talk, Middle East peace is nothing, apparently, compared to the search for "peace" in the abortion wars. Peace? Peace? By and large, we have that. In spite of one of the most intense moral disagreements possible -- where close to half the American people believe that a legal slaughter of a million persons takes place each year -- peace reigns; the civil order is sustained. Brother does not take up arms against brother over this issue. Instead, we hold elections and discussions and conferences.Is this really so bad?But there's a large subtext to the discussion here: By "peace," I think people like Frances Kissling mean a stable political compromise that takes abortion out of the political process in such a way that Democrats don't lose elections because of the issue. She pretty much comes out and admits that, writing in Salon.com that "the damaging effect of abortion conflict on the political process has pushed moderates on all sides toward more civil debate, which was a goal of the conference."She means, I suspect, that groups like the Susan B. Anthony List have grown into political powerhouses by raising money to knock off pro-abortion politicians in swing districts that the Democrats would like to win. That's what "peace" means to Kissling and friends. They are looking for a way to win the "middle" and put the pro-life political movement out of business. She's particularly willing, if not eager, to concede that late-term abortions might have to go. It's a big concession from her point of view.Will Saletan has chimed in with his version of the great compromise: We start a new push to stigmatize those who fail to use contraception, fund unwed mothers better, and consider limiting second-trimester and other late-term abortion. Pro-lifers give up opposition to contraception, and pro-choicers assign some value to the fetus and to reducing the abortion rate. As on the gay marriage issue (another issue which is difficult to compromise), the futility of imagining a "deal" quickly becomes evident. Cultural contests on core moral assumptions cannot be settled by political compromise, since there is no one authorized to make such a deal. And the reality is, because each side operates from deeply different core moral assumptions, each side is willing only to take the half-loaf while working toward the full loaf."Common ground" quickly becomes a euphemism for finding a way to make abortion a pro-Democratic rather than a pro-Republican "wedge" issue.There is only one real way to do this: Overturn Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade, in my view, damaged our political process by elevating the killing of an unborn child to a sacred Constitutional right. But Roe v. Wade has also damaged our political process by protecting pro-abortion folks from the necessity of entering into it. The Supreme Court is doing pro-choicers' work for them, and in the process, preventing them from the necessity of building political alliances with the middle.You want to put us "absolute" pro-lifers on the spot? Repeal Roe v. Wade.Then in the democratic process, all of us Americans would have to make hard new choices about how anti-abortion and how pro-life we really are willing to be.(Maggie Gallagher is the founder of the National Organization for Marriage and has been a syndicated columnist for 14 years.)BPM 08-08 tracks.Sierra (Terratec) mp3 download.Pizzicato Five We Love You tracks.Special (New mixes) (VR036) tracks.Earthloop mp3 albums